It's no surprise that Rick Perry is the media's darling new candidate. He's brash, Southern, outspoken and has some deliciously offbeat ideas. He's tailor-made for the 24-hour news networks.
So, I'm not shocked that Perry is getting the bulk of the coverage from all the networks, not just the conservative ones.
But Perry fever, or maybe something else, is shutting other viable candidates like Buddy Roemer, the former governor of Louisiana, and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, out of getting any coverage at all.
Roemer wanted to participate in the presidential debate in California, but was not invited.
The reason given was that he had not attained a 4 percent rating in any national poll.
Evidently, that meant any poll at any time, because Newt Gingrich spoke, and according to the latest Gallup poll, he's hitting a cool 3 percent.
Neither Paul nor Roemer are big money candidates, and I think that is the problem. Both have spoken out against corruption in the election system and government as a whole.
Paul came in second in the Iowa straw poll and got hardly any coverage. Roemer has been both governor of Louisiana and a senator, and after only four weeks of campaigning is tied at one percent in polls with John Huntsman.
He is also a strong voice against special interests and corruption both in the political system as a whole and in the election process.
He seems to be tailor made for the nomination — Southern, relatable, and according to Roemer's website, his economic policies while he was governor of Louisiana cut unemployment in half.
He also would be an excellent bipartisan player, as he was once a Democrat and switched parties in March 1991.
Paul, too, seems like a candidate who would be receiving mountains of support, especially from the Tea Party, which has emerged as an extremely powerful voice in the Republican camp.
In fact, Paul was referred to in an Associated Press article as a “spiritual father and actual father” of the Tea Party movement — his son, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, is also prominent Tea Party member.
But they seem to be disliked, unwanted and uncovered by the media.
Why tell Roemer he can't participate in the debate? He is a viable candidate, even if his campaign has just got off the ground. Donald Trump debated, why can't Buddy Roemer?
Michelle Bachmann, another Tea Party darling, has been receiving oodles of attention from the media.
I have a theory about this. Both of these candidates are anti-big campaign money and both are grassroots candidates.
I don't think either of those stances endears them either to their own party or to the media. A big-money candidate is exciting to cover, but one whose campaign coffers are comparably empty, not so much.
It is a testament to how low the presidential campaign has sunk when a prerequisite for election is having lots and lots of very rich friends who want to back your campaign.
When a candidate, like Roemer or Paul, are just dismissed because they don't have the funds that megastars like Perry or former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney do, it is a disservice to the American political system.
This early in the race, every voice should be heard, not just the ones with rich friends.
Reach the columnist at oonagh.mcquarrie@asu.edu
Click here to subscribe to the daily State Press newsletter.
